California Court of Appeal Sep 7, 2023 No. E079444Published
Filed 9/7/23
CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION *
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E079444
v. (Super.Ct.No. FVI18002609)
ANTHONY NARRO, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. John P.
Vander Feer, Judge. Affirmed.
Mark D. Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
* Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 8.1105(b) and 8.1110, this opinion is certified for publication with the exception of part A of the discussion.
1
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Melissa A. Mandel, Seth M.
Friedman and Joseph C. Anagnos, Deputy Attorney Generals, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
Defendant and appellant Anthony Narro molested two of his stepdaughters and
one of his stepdaughter’s friends for a period of over 10 years. He was convicted of
numerous sexual offenses and sentenced to 195 years to life. On appeal he contends
(1) the judgment should be reversed because CALCRIM No. 1191B violated his right to
due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the federal Constitution by allowing
jurors to rely on currently charged crimes to find he had the propensity to commit other
currently charged crimes; and (2) the trial court erred by awarding restitution in the
amount of $9,461.34 as noneconomic damages pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4,
subdivision (f)(3)(F) 1 in order for a victim’s mother to replace the furniture where the
molestations had occurred as the furniture invoked painful memories.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
A. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Defendant was charged in a third amended information with committing multiple
sexual offenses against multiple victims. Several counts involving Kaylin A.,
defendant’s stepdaughter, were alleged to have occurred between January 2011 and
September 2018. These counts included oral copulation or sexual penetration of a child
1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
2
under the age of 10 (§ 288.7, subd. (b); counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6); and committing a lewd act
upon a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (a); counts 4, 7). It was further alleged for
counts 4 and 7 that defendant had committed the offense of lewd act on a child under the
age of 14 against more than one victim (§ 667.61, subds. (b) & (e)).
In count 8, defendant was charged with forcible rape of Jazmin W. on August 31,
2018 (§ 261, subd. (a)(2).) It was further alleged as to count 8 that defendant had
committed forcible rape against more than one victim within the meaning of section
667.61 subdivisions (b), and (e).
Count 9 alleged that defendant committed the offense of a lewd act upon a child in
violation of section 288, subdivision (a), against Rebecca W. in 2018. Defendant was
charged in count 10 with a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 (§ 288, subd. (a))
against Isabella K., occurring between July and August 2017. It was further alleged as to
counts 9 and 10 that defendant had committed a lewd act against more than one victim
within the meaning of section 667.61, subdivisions (b), and (e).
Counts 11 through 13 involved sexual offenses committed against Kassandra N.
from 2003 through 2017. Counts 11 and 12 charged defendant with oral copulation or
sexual penetration of a child under the age of 10 (§ 288.7, subd. (a)); count 13, charged
defendant with committing a lewd act upon a child (§ 288, subd. (a)). Finally, count 14
charged defendant with committing a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14, Amanda
B., on or about December 10, 2010, and December 31, 2010. It was further alleged as to
counts 13 and 14 that defendant had committed a lewd act against more than one victim
within the meaning of section 667.61, subdivisions (b) and (e).
3
Defendant was found guilty of all counts and special allegations except the jury
was hung on the determination of count 8, the forcible rape of Jazmin. The prosecutor
dismissed the charge. Defendant was sentenced to a total state prison sentence of 195
years to life. A victim restitution hearing was held, as will be discussed in more detail,
post.
B. FACTUAL HISTORY
1. PEOPLE’S CASE-IN-CHIEF
a. Kaylin (Counts 1-7)
Kaylin was 16 years old at the time of trial. Defendant had been married to her
mother, Wendy. Defendant started touching Kaylin sexually when she was five years
old. The first time he touched her they were living in La Habra. She had done something
to get in trouble, but Wendy was not home to discipline her. Defendant asked if she
wanted to do something for him rather than be punished. He asked her to “suck his
dick.” He unzipped his pants and put his penis in her mouth. He then pushed her head
forward. This went on for some time until other people arrived home. Defendant told
her not to tell anyone. She did not tell Wendy because she “[she] didn’t know it was
wrong. [She] just knew [she] wasn’t going to get spanked.” 2 Also when she was five
years old, defendant was in her bedroom and started describing all of her body parts and
kissing them. He kissed and licked her vagina. He tried to put his finger inside her
2 Kaylin cried throughout her testimony.
4
vagina, but it hurt, and she told him to stop. He put his penis on her vagina and “started
rubbing it . . . up and down.”
Defendant made her orally copulate him once a week, licked her vagina and
rubbed his penis on her vagina “countless” times when she was five years old. The acts
would occur in her bedroom or in the living room if Wendy was not at the house. When
she was six years old, he started showing her animated pornographic films. He came into
her room at least once a week when she was six years old and made her orally copulate
him. This occurred at least five times. He also licked her vagina and rubbed his penis on
her vagina more than five times. He told her not to tell anyone.
When she was seven years old, he continued to commit the same sexual acts on
her at least once each week. When she was eight and nine years old, he increased the
frequency of the sexual acts to more than once each week. He would touch her late at
night when everyone else was asleep.
When she was 10 years old, Wendy had to move to Needles, but Kaylin had to
finish school before she could move. Kaylin and defendant stayed together alone in a
house in Whittier. The sexual acts became more frequent because they shared a room.
She finally moved with Wendy in Needles in sixth grade.
In 2017, she started having her friend Isabella over at her house. Defendant would
let Isabella come over to the house if Kaylin agreed to orally copulate him. She had to
orally copulate him about once a week in 2017. He had ejaculated in her mouth and she
spit it out. Also during this time, he would make her lay down naked on a couch cushion
that was in their den and he would rub his penis on her breasts and vagina.
5
Kaylin witnessed defendant touch Isabella and told him to stop. She also heard
defendant comment on Isabella’s breasts. Isabella stopped coming to her house in 2018.
Isabella told Kaylin that defendant had grabbed her breasts when she got out of the
shower.
Her other friend Rebeka started coming to her house all the time in 2017 and 2018.
She had seen defendant tickle Rebeka and grab her breasts. In 2018, defendant continued
to make Kaylin orally copulate him and rubbed his penis on her vagina. Finally, in July
or August 2018, Kaylin texted defendant that she wanted him to stop touching her. He
cried and told her he was sorry. Two weeks later he took off her pants and licked her
vagina.
Eventually, Kaylin told Wendy what was happening, and Wendy called law
enforcement. Kaylin finally told because her friends told her that he was also molesting
them.
b. Jazmin, Rebeka, and Isabella (Counts 8-10)
Isabella was 17 years old at the time of trial. Isabella was friends with Kaylin in
sixth grade when she was 11 or 12 years old. She knew defendant as Kaylin’s stepfather.
Isabella frequently went to Kaylin’s house in the summer of 2017. The first time
defendant touched her, she was getting ready to take a shower and was having trouble
getting the shower to work. Defendant came into the bathroom to help her and hugged
her. He put his hands down her pants and squeezed her buttocks.
The second time defendant touched Isabella, she was in the bathroom getting
ready to take a shower. Kaylin was using another bathroom to take a shower. Defendant
6
came into the bathroom to give Isabella a towel. He lifted Isabella’s shirt. He touched
his mouth to her breasts. He licked, sucked and bit her nipples. She tried to push him
away but he would not stop. He finally got upset at her and left. She did not tell any
adults because he told her not to tell anyone. 3 She indicated that defendant did this
several times.
The next time defendant touched Isabella they were in his car. He picked her up
and Kaylin was not in the car. He told her Kaylin was sleeping at home. While he was
driving, he reached over and grabbed her breasts.
Isabella stayed the night at Kaylin’s house that night. She, Kaylin and defendant
sat on the couch watching a movie. While they were watching the movie, he told Kaylin
and Isabella that they were going to have fun tonight and that they were going to put their
mouths on his penis. Isabella moved away from defendant and close to Kaylin.
Defendant grabbed or slapped Isabella’s face. Isabella got up and went to the bedroom.
She did not tell anyone. She was afraid of defendant because she had seen defendant be
violent with members of his family.
Defendant asked Isabella another time to put her mouth on his penis. He also
continued hugging her. He bit her breast through her shirt one time. She spoke with
police in 2018 but it was at her school and she had a hard time talking about what
happened to her.
3 For the first time at trial, Isabella testified that defendant put his mouth on her breasts almost every time she was at their house.
7
Rebeka was 15 years old at the time of trial and had been best friends with Kaylin.
She knew defendant as Kaylin’s stepfather. Rebeka spent a lot of time at Kaylin’s house
during the summer of 2018. She would have been 11 years old. The first time defendant
touched her, he said goodnight to her and kissed her on the lips. He grabbed her
buttocks. She was scared and did not tell Kaylin. Defendant kissed her and grabbed her
buttocks at least five times.
On one occasion in July 2018 she was getting ready to get into the shower and he
came in and “groped” her chest. She was still wearing her bra and he groped her over the
bra. She told him no and ran. She did not tell anyone. Defendant oftentimes made
sexual comments to her, such as that she had big breasts or a “nice butt.” She continued
going to Kaylin’s house because she wanted to be Kaylin’s best friend.
Jazmin was 22 years old at the time of trial and was Rebeka’s sister. She met
defendant at his birthday party at the end of summer or fall of 2018 when she was 18
years old. Defendant asked Rebeka in front of Jazmin if Jazmin was his birthday present.
After the party, Jazmin and Rebeka stayed the night at the house. Jazmin slept on the
couch. At one point defendant came into the living room and started tickling her. She
told him that she was not ticklish. She told him to stop but he did not. Defendant
eventually went to his room that he shared with Wendy.
Jazmin woke up in the middle of the night to find defendant trying to take her
pants off. He may have kissed her. She froze. She did not scream because she was
afraid for Rebeka. He asked her if she was on birth control and she said no. He went and
retrieved a condom. She did not get up and leave because she was panicked. Defendant
8
returned and put on the condom. He pushed her legs apart and put his penis in her
vagina. Jazmin said nothing to defendant but she did not consent to defendant having sex
with her. While he was penetrating her, Wendy came out and caught him. Defendant
jumped up, told Jazmin he was sorry and went into the bedroom with Wendy.
Jazmin panicked and did not know what to do. Defendant and Wendy emerged
from the bedroom. Defendant told Jazmin he was sorry and hugged her. Wendy told her
that she loved her and that she forgave her. Jazmin took a shower because she felt
“filthy.” Jazmin did not tell Wendy that the sex was not consensual because she did not
want to cause any problems.
Jazmin went back to sleep and went home the next morning. She later told
Rebeka and Kaylin what had happened. Rebeka told Jazmin what had happened to her
but they did not contact law enforcement. Kaylin disclosed several weeks later what
defendant was doing to her. Kaylin eventually told Wendy, and law enforcement became
involved.
c. Kassandra (Counts 11-13)
Kassandra was born in November 1997, and was 24 years old at the time of trial.
Defendant had been her stepfather. The last time she saw defendant in person was in
2008 when she was 10 years old. They lived in Los Angeles County when defendant was
married to her mother. The first time defendant touched her, when she was seven or eight
years old, they were at a hotel. He took off her clothes and rubbed her vagina and breasts
while she was in the shower. He took her to the bed and touched the same places.
Approximately one year later, he again rubbed her breasts and vagina. She believed it
9
was March or April 2008. He also penetrated her vagina with his fingers and put his
mouth on her vagina. She cried and screamed. She tried to get away from defendant but
he was too strong. She was scared of him because at the time he would punch her hard
causing bruises.
Kassandra stated defendant would commit these acts almost every day that she
was not at school. He put his mouth on her vagina only a couple of times. She did not
tell anyone because she was scared and did not know what was happening to her. The
sexual acts stopped when Kassandra’s grandfather walked in on defendant and her on the
couch. She told her mother; defendant left the home and she never saw him again. She
spoke with the police in 2008 but nothing happened to defendant.
Kassandra’s mother testified that she and defendant were married in 2005 and that
he took care of Kassandra while she was at work. She ended her marriage with defendant
based on things that Kassandra told her about defendant.
d. Amanda B. (Count 14)
Amanda B. was 22 years old at the time of trial. When she was 10 or 11 years old,
defendant was a family friend. Amanda called defendant Uncle Anthony. Defendant
was married to Wendy at the time. One night, Amanda’s mother left her with Wendy and
defendant while she went out on a date. Kaylin was only four or five years old at the
time and she could not recall if Kaylin was at the apartment that night. Wendy was not
home.
Amanda and defendant sat on the couch in the living room and watched a movie.
He reached under her shirt and touched both of her breasts. He also reached down her
10
pants and touched her buttocks. She told him to stop but he refused. He eventually
stopped and she went to sleep in one of the bedrooms. She woke up and defendant was
lying beside her with his hand in her pants. He put one or two fingers inside her vagina.
It hurt and she was scared. He also moved his hand and touched her breasts. She froze
and did not say anything. She waited several days until she told anyone what had
happened. 4
5. EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO ALL COUNTS
The prosecution also presented the testimony of Dr. Veronica Thomas regarding
Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS). She described CSAAS as a
disclosure pattern by victims of child abuse. It was a therapy tool but it was not a
diagnostic tool. There were commonalities among victims of child sex abuse, which
included secrecy, helplessness, accommodation or repression, disclosure and recanting.
Each child would remember incidents of sexual abuse based on their ability to recall their
experience. It was possible for victims to exaggerate the child sexual abuse but they
could also underreport. Dr. Thomas did not speak with any of the victims in the case.
Wendy testified that she and defendant moved in together in September 2009 and
married in June 2010. They had lived in several cities since they had been married before
they settled in Needles. Defendant lived with Kaylin from 2009 to 2018.
4 Amanda spoke with the police in 2010 and 2018. She described defendant touching her vagina and using circular motions and not that he digitally penetrated her.
11
B. DEFENSE
Wendy was recalled by the defense. She met defendant when Kaylin was five
years old. Wendy had been contacted by the La Habra police about Amanda accusing
defendant of touching her inappropriately in December 2010. Wendy told the police
officer that she had been home with Amanda and defendant and nothing had happened
but at trial she admitted that she was not at the house the entire time Amanda was with
defendant.
Wendy indicated that defendant wrestled with the children all the time. It was just
for fun and to teach them to defend themselves. She did not think it was sexual. Kaylin
had asked Wendy some sexual questions when she was young but Wendy assumed that it
was because Kaylin had walked in on her and defendant while they were having sex. She
had no idea that the abuse was occurring between 2010 and 2018.
Wendy recalled that Isabella and Rebeka had used the shower in the bathroom
attached to her bedroom but did not see defendant also enter the bathroom with them.
Wendy had seen defendant on top of Jazmin with his pants down on the night of his
birthday party. She contemplated divorcing him.
La Habra Police Lieutenant Jose Rocha police testified about the investigation of
the case involving Amanda. He interviewed Wendy at the time. She told him that
Amanda’s allegations did not make sense and that she never left Amanda alone with
defendant.
12
Kaylin’s father testified. He had been married to Wendy. He had known Wendy
since 1999. Kaylin’s father believed that Wendy was a very manipulative person and
was not truthful. It was his opinion that Kaylin had been manipulated by Wendy.
Defendant testified on his own behalf. Kassandra was his stepdaughter in 2008.
He lived with Kassandra and her mother in a room in a house that was occupied by
several other people. He denied that he touched her inappropriately.
Kassandra’s mother told defendant to leave the family home, and he met Wendy.
Defendant denied that when he was alone with Kaylin that he touched her
inappropriately. Defendant recalled that Kaylin had walked in on him and Wendy several
times while they were engaged in sexual relations.
He denied that he was ever alone with Amanda. He never went into the bedroom
where she was sleeping in the middle of the night. 5 Defendant was questioned by the La
Habra Police Department regarding Amanda’s accusations and denied that anything had
happened with her. He told the police that Amanda had made similar accusations against
other men. Charges were not brought against him. Defendant wrestled and tickled
Amanda as he did with Kaylin and his son.
Defendant insisted that Wendy was always home working on her computer. He
was rarely left alone with Kaylin. He denied he ever sexually inappropriately touched
Kaylin. He never went into her room in the middle of the night. He never made her
5 On cross-examination, defendant admitted that he took Amanda to the store. They were alone driving there and back. They were also alone in the house for a period of time while Wendy was at a meeting.
13
perform sexual acts instead of disciplining her. He admitted that he and Kaylin lived just
the two of them for a period of time and stayed in the same room. He denied he ever
touched her sexually. Wendy found defendant and Kaylin wrestling on her bed one time
and asked what he was doing.
He was alone a few times with Isabella in his car and it was common for Isabella
to take a shower at their house. He denied ever making sexually explicit comments to
Isabella or touching her. He did tickle and wrestle with Isabella but only when other
people were present. He also admitted to being in the bathroom alone with Isabella when
she would take a shower to help her start the shower or to give her a towel. He tickled
and wrestled with Rebeka.
Defendant admitted having sexual intercourse with Jazmin but he believed it was
consensual. Defendant believed that Kaylin and the other girls were mad at him for
cheating on Wendy with Jazmin. Kaylin only made the accusations because she was
upset he cheated on Wendy. During a pretext phone call, Kaylin accused defendant of
forcing her to orally copulate him and saying sexually inappropriate things to her for
eight years. Defendant responded that it happened a long time ago and that he was a
“dumb ass.” He insisted he was talking about hurting her while they were wrestling even
though Kaylin never brought this up. He insisted he apologized throughout the pretext
phone call for having had sex with Jazmin and not because he molested Kaylin.
14
DISCUSSION
A. CALCRIM NO. 1191B
Defendant contends, despite established California Supreme Court precedent
affirming the instruction, that by instructing the jury with CALCRIM No. 1191B, which
allowed the jury to consider its finding of guilt on one currently charged sexual offense to
show that he had the propensity to commit the other currently charged sexual offenses,
the trial court violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and a fair trial.
Defendant insists that all of his convictions should be reversed due to the giving of the
instruction, or in the alternative, counts 11, 12, 13 and 14 should be reversed.
1. ADDITIONAL FACTUAL HISTORY
After defense counsel finished his closing argument, the parties met outside the
presence of the jury and the trial court noted that it had inadvertently not given
CALCRIM No. 1191B. Defense counsel stated on the record, “Object and submit.” The
trial court agreed to give the instruction after the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument.
The jury was instructed with CALCRIM No. 1191B as follows: “The People
presented evidence that the defendant committed the crimes of oral copulation or sexual
penetration with child 10 years old or younger, charged in Counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 11, 12;
forcible rape charged in Count 8; and lewd act upon a child under age 14 in counts 4, 7,
9, 10, 13, and 14.
“If the People have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
committed one or more of these crimes, you may, but are not required to, conclude from
that evidence that the defendant was disposed or inclined to commit sexual offenses, and
15
based on that decision, also conclude that the defendant was likely to commit the other
sex offenses charged in this case.
“If you find that the defendant committed one or more of these crimes, that
conclusion is only one factor to consider along with all the other evidence. It is not
sufficient by itself to prove that the defendant is guilty of another crime. The People
must still prove each charge beyond a reasonable doubt.”
2. WAIVER
Defendant argues on appeal that despite being aware that in People v. Villatoro
(2012) 54 Cal.4th 1152 (Villatoro), the California Supreme Court approved of
CALCRIM No. 1191B, he brings this appeal to preserve his federal constitutional claim
that his Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and a fundamentally fair trial were
violated by the trial court so instructing the jury. As noted by the People, defendant
never objected in the trial court on federal constitutional grounds. “It is elementary that
defendant waived these claims by failing to articulate an objection on federal